If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to OCF! Join us to comment and to customize your site experience! Members have access to different forum appearance options, and many more functions.

It isn't cheating if you are just changing settings that are in the company-supplied drivers page, now if people were opening up .dlls and making it so that the card couldn't render Tesselation when it should be doing so then that is breaking rules.

It just sucks that nVidia doesn't have the same capability, especially for people that are benchers.

I know what he mean, i did understand it from the beginning but its cheating, thats how i call it. I said that im unable to understand because i didnt actually expect such benchers using dirty tricks and i simply leave it by that. But finally the correct stuff is to leave it at default, means it should use it at the level such as Nvidia does. Its not a bad option to be able to make such finetuning (immense gain for real situation, when you want to get the most out of it) but sadly it does allow for unfair behaviours.

However, with or without tesselation, the 7000 series will clearly beat the 580 GTX in long term, because neither the games nor the drivers are fully optimized yet, the hardware is simply to much of a child at the current date. It already is beating by 20% (overall) at real situations, but the distance will be even higher and surely no "cheating" needed, there is no need for it, its tesselation is superior to the 580 GTX. Even allowing so much finetuning is a clear sign of its superiority. AMD/ATI was always the forerunner of tesselation. Just with the Fermi architecture Nvidia truly was pumping massive effort into it and did even stomp down the 6000 series on raw performance. However, the 7000 series will get the throne back and continuing where AMD/ATI started on its very tesselation capable consumer cards.

If I were using that setting to artificially increase comparison results in any review, I'd wholeheartedly agree that's crooked and dishonest. We do not do that here. As I already said, all comparison benchmarks are run at default settings; except overclocked comparison benches, where the only thing changed are clockspeeds and, if available, voltage. Even my pushing-the-envelope benchmarks (screenshots toward the end of the review) for reviews are run at default settings. Only after the reviews are completed do I work on additional tweaking to see how scores can be improved.

You are free to disagree and it's no skin off my back if you want to think a legal, known and readily admitted tweak shouldn't be allowed; but do not come here and accuse me of cheating. That, sir, is one thing I do not, have not and will not do.

Awesome work Hokie, you the man! I'll keep an eye out for the stream, was busy this afternoon and missed it.

Originally Posted by notJUSTguitar

WOW awesome

If you ran some benches with an AMD cpu, would the results be way lower?
And would a 2600/2700K be able to get close to that?

And i'm bummed i missed the livestream.

AMD cpu's would do poorly, though it may not be a huge difference - heaven is one of the better 3d benchmarks for isolating the GPU performance. Other 3d benchmarks, like 3d03 especially, are well known for being very dependent upon the CPU performance - my Bulldozer at 7GHz with a 5870 at 1300/1200 put up a score comparable to i7 920 on a moderate overclock with the 5870 at 1050/1200.

A 2600k or 2700k would put up about the same scores, possibly better as many of those clock higher than 5GHz. Again though, I don't think heaven is that sensitive to CPU clock speed.

Thanks!

Ok thanks. I kinda meant benchmarks in general with 7970 but AMD vs Intel scores.

I might switch to Intel later this year & water cool if I have the money.

Ok, i'll watch the benching section

for competitive benching, like on hwbot.org, no one would run bulldozer with a 7970. the scores would generally be smashed by any sandybridge platform, even if the AMD system was clocked thru the roof - a moderate OC on sandybridge on air would beat a bulldozer on ln2. For the 2600k you mentioned, 3d benches would be very similar, except the ones which include multithreaded CPU tests - SB-E is would rule those rankings.

for non-competitive benchmarking, we'd have to see someone actually run the tests to know how big the difference is.

windwithme did a review recently comparing bulldozer in 3d to an 1100t. he was going to include a sandybridge, but didn't as it would clobber both in most benches. the 1100t beats bulldozer handily in most 3d benches.

If I were using that setting to artificially increase comparison results in any review, I'd wholeheartedly agree that's crooked and dishonest.

Dont get me wrong, i said it was a cheat on HWbot, not in the review. My stuff was wholely directed to HWbot. My view is, if they just wanna win the race then why not just to delete all dll which does affect settings, or what else. Its simply not honest to provide benches using tweaked settings which does give a advantage over another GPU by software. Finally its very hard for users to see the truth behind those data and it will render itself useless. If he didnt tell me, i would still have no clue that they actually tweak software related stuff.

I never ever was expressing in any known or unknown way that any of the reviews posted on Overclockers was "unclean". Just to get that right.

Dont get me wrong, i said it was a cheat on HWbot, not in the review. My stuff was wholely directed to HWbot. My view is, if they just wanna win the race then why not just to delete all dll which does affect settings, or what else. Its simply not honest to provide benches using tweaked settings which does give a advantage over another GPU by software. Finally its very hard for users to see the truth behind those data and it will render itself useless. If he didnt tell me, i would still have no clue that they actually tweak software related stuff.

I never ever was expressing in any known or unknown way that any of the reviews posted on Overclockers was "unclean". Just to get that right.

Now finish with.

You are not familiar with HWBot. HWBot is an overclocking competition platform that defines a set of rules for everyone in the public to participate by - everyone competing in their rankings has the ability to use the same tweaks, if they are knowledgeable of them. They allow almost any tweak possible in their rankings, except those specifically disallowed in the rules. Everyone there taking part, mostly, understands the rules and interprets their rankings as is appropriate. Keep in mind if tweaking is not allowed, then there is no reason to compete - if everyone runs at default settings, everyone would get pretty much the same score. The knowledge of how to get the best scores on a given benchmark is ultimately what separates the average from the greats.

It is their site, they make the rules, everyone who takes part plays by them. It isn't a cheat if they say it is allowed - they allow almost anything, so long as the benchmark software itself is not modified.

Keep in mind, different cards have different capabilities. Drivers have different defaults. In reviews, things are commonly ran at default, or well-informed settings that make the comparison "fair" or as "accurate" as possible. On a site like hwbot, people spend tons of money on hardware and LN2 and exotic voltmods to get the best scores possible - it is more "anything goes" to get "the highest score possible" sort of thing there.

In the end, when a person builds a site and creates an audience, that person gets to make the rules and people will choose if it makes sense to play within those rules. A lot of people think it makes sense to play by hwbot rules. People can disagree with their rules, and they can not take part - they could even call their rules cheating, but that isn't really fair to them to call it cheating.

By the way, I don't intend to argue with you and can respect your perspective. I'm just sharing my perspective on behalf of the site. Sorry to distract further from the 7970 and its performance - this isn't really a thread about hwbot.

You cant trust the people that the stuff they are telling is true, but finally its his site and his rules sure... i keep out of it because i wouldnt fully trust it.

Lets continue on the main topic i guess.

Well, the 580 GTX is now beaten on Unigine Xtreme aswell, by Aristidis. Considering that there are only 4 cards out there on HWbot of the 7000 series type, i still find it great, no matter what settings actually been used. He was already hitting the 1900 MHZ memory mark, i rather dont wanna guess how much more is actually possible when there is more than 100 of those on HWbot. I dont take the results as fully accurate but it still can deliever a view of its raw possibilitys. What i found fun, he did use a windows classic desktop design so that the GPU will not lose any kind of power to it . Those people definitely are perfectionists. Also fun to see that Hokies SB-E CPU at 5GHz clock is way more powerful than Aristidis 2600K at 5.3 GHz clock but for those benchmarks it doesnt matter, because GPU limited.